The accusations center on a petition submitted to the Lumberton Township Municipal Clerk ahead of the June Democratic primary.
Prosecutors say Carty submitted the paperwork while LaPlaca signed an affidavit attesting to the authenticity of the signatures.
In that affidavit, LaPlaca stated she “personally circulated the petition [and] that such petition was signed by each of the signers thereof in his/her own handwriting.”
That sworn declaration is now at the heart of the prosecution’s case.
Investigators say they contacted people whose names appeared on the petition and found that several claimed they had never signed it and had not given anyone permission to sign on their behalf.
“An investigation by the Prosecutor’s Office revealed that multiple individuals whose names and purported signatures appeared on LaPlaca’s nominating petition indicated they had neither signed the petition nor authorized anyone to do so on their behalf in support of the candidate’s nomination,” the Burlington County Prosecutor’s Office said.
The alleged signatures were not simply a minor technical issue. Prosecutors say they were necessary for LaPlaca to qualify for the primary ballot.
Without the disputed signatures, officials determined that LaPlaca’s petition would not have contained enough valid signatures to meet the requirements for a place on the Democratic primary ballot.
That makes the case particularly significant because the alleged misconduct goes directly to the process by which candidates qualify to seek public office.
LaPlaca ultimately finished third in the Democratic contest for two township committee positions. Current Mayor Terrance Benson and Kendra Hatfield finished ahead of her, leaving LaPlaca outside the two winning spots.
According to the latest reports, LaPlaca received 323 votes, while Benson received 1,100 and Hatfield received 1,052.
The new allegations arrive only months after LaPlaca entered a guilty plea in a separate case involving drunk driving and child endangerment.
The earlier incident occurred on March 17, 2025, when prosecutors said LaPlaca drove after drinking and had her young son in the vehicle. A witness reported seeing her vehicle swerving and nearly striking a utility pole. Police later reviewed video of the driving and arrested her after she returned home.
Authorities ultimately determined that LaPlaca’s blood-alcohol concentration was 0.30%, more than three times New Jersey’s legal limit of 0.08%.
In March 2026, LaPlaca pleaded guilty to driving under the influence and child endangerment. Rather than serving jail time, she was admitted to a three-year Pretrial Intervention program for first-time offenders. The conditions include regular Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, compliance with child-protection requirements and the use of an ignition interlock device.
LaPlaca previously served as Lumberton’s mayor through 2025 and remained on the township committee after leaving the mayor’s office. Her committee term is scheduled to expire in December.
Now, the former mayor faces a second legal controversy involving the political process itself.
The allegations against LaPlaca and Carty remain allegations unless and until proven in court. Still, the accusations raise serious questions about the integrity of candidate petitions and the safeguards used to verify signatures before names appear on an election ballot.
For voters, the issue is straightforward: election petitions are supposed to demonstrate genuine support from qualified voters. If prosecutors prove that signatures were knowingly submitted without authorization, the case could become another reminder that even local elections depend on basic rules of honesty and accountability.
The political consequences have already been substantial. LaPlaca failed to win another committee seat in June, and she now has to defend herself against a new set of criminal allegations.
LaPlaca and Carty are scheduled to appear in court in Mount Holly on September 21.
For a former mayor who has spent the past year attempting to recover politically and personally from a highly publicized DUI case, the latest charges represent yet another serious challenge.
The courtroom—not political spin—will ultimately determine what happened with the disputed signatures.
And this time, the question is not whether LaPlaca had enough votes to win.
It is whether the signatures used to get her onto the ballot were legitimate in the first place.
